New Delhi: Activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam have moved fresh bail applications before a Delhi court in the larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots. The applicants contend that their continued incarceration for nearly six years without the commencement of a trial violates their fundamental right to liberty. Additional Sessions Judge Sumedh Saini has sought a formal response from the Delhi Police on both pleas and has listed the matter for a detailed hearing on July 4, 2026.
The legal move comes six months after the Supreme Court, on January 5, 2026, refused them bail while granting relief to co-accused individuals, including Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmad. At the time, a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria observed a prima facie case against Khalid and Imam under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), ruling that all accused could not be treated equally due to a “hierarchy of participation”. However, the fresh applications argue that subsequent judicial developments and judgments from the apex court constitute a significant “change in circumstances”.
In his application, Umar Khalid cited prolonged incarceration and a delayed trial, submitting that he has spent nearly six years in custody without charges even being framed. His plea notes that the trial is unlikely to commence in the near future given the large number of accused persons, witnesses, and extensive prosecution documents. Khalid’s counsel referred to a subsequent May 18, 2026 order by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court in a separate terror-related case, which granted bail to an accused, criticised the January 5 verdict, and emphasised that anti-terror laws must not become tools for indefinite detention. The plea cited landmark judgements, including Union of India versus K A Najeeb and Vernon Gonsalves versus State of Maharashtra, to assert that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAPA cannot override constitutional protections when a trial is unlikely to conclude within a reasonable time.
Sharjeel Imam’s application similarly argued that there has been no significant development in the legal proceedings since the January 5 judgment. His plea stated that subsequent Supreme Court rulings, such as Syed Iftikhar Andrabi versus NIA and Tasleem Ahmed versus State (Govt of NCT of Delhi), have further clarified the legal position regarding the grant of bail in cases involving long incarceration under the UAPA. Furthermore, Imam’s counsel maintained that he was not even present in Delhi after the second week of January 2020 and was already in custody in connection with another case before the communal riots broke out in northeast Delhi in February of that year.
Both activists, alongside several others, were originally booked under the anti-terror UAPA and various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly orchestrating a larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 violence. The communal riots, which erupted during intense protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), resulted in 53 fatalities and left over 700 people injured.
